A clinical comparison of 28 patients was done in a double-blind fashion to evaluate the effectiveness of 1.5
etidocaine with
epinephrine 1:200,000 and 2%
lidocaine with
epinephrine 1:100,000 in
oral surgery. The patients selected had no medical problems, but required the extraction of bilaterally impacted third molars. Each subject served as his or her own control with
etidocaine being used to produce
local anesthesia on one side of the face, and
lidocaine on the opposite side. The results were evaluated to allow a comparison of the onset and quality of
anesthesia; the duration of lip
numbness and the onset of
postoperative pain; and the incidence, type, and severity of adverse reactions. Both
lidocaine and
etidocaine were similar in onset and quality of
anesthesia. No adverse reactions were observed with either agent. The two
anesthetics differed mainly in their durations of action.
Etidocaine proved 2.16 times longer acting than
lidocaine with respect to recovery from lower lip
numbness and 1.75 times longer acting than
lidocaine with respect to the onset of
postoperative pain. Therefore, the conclusion was reached that 1.5%
etidocaine with
epinephrine 1:200,000 is an effective
local anesthetic for use in
oral surgery because it has a rapid onset, provides profound
anesthesia, and possesses a longer duration of action than 2%
lidocaine with
epinephrine 1:100,000. The final characteristic is of particular value as the onset of
postoperative pain is significantly delayed.